European Concerted Action on Anticoagulation (ECAA). Minimum number of centres for reliable International Sensitivity Index calibration of CoaguChek and TAS point-of-care whole blood monitors

Point-of-care antithrombotic monitoring in children

INTRODUCTION

The use of oral anticoagulant therapy is increasing in children. Managing anticoagulant therapy in children presents unique challenges, including poor venous access. The advent of point-of-care (POC) monitoring of anticoagulant therapy offers a potential solution to this challenge. This paper reviews the published literature relating to POC monitoring of oral anticoagulant therapy in children.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A Medline search was conducted and identified key publications. Papers were reviewed with respect to their objectives, populations and POC device investigated. Study limitations were identified.

RESULTS

Five publications and one abstract were identified, reporting studies using five different POC monitors. Three studies had a strong clinical management focus. Outcome measures assessed included target therapeutic range achievement and frequency of adverse events. Correlation between POC and laboratory-based results ranged from 0.83 to 0.96. Home monitoring and self-management using POC monitors were both reported to be preferred compared to standard laboratory testing.

CONCLUSIONS

POC monitoring of oral anticoagulant therapy in children offers considerable advantages. The reviewed literature would suggest such monitoring can be performed accurately and reliably. The impact of quality control issues, such as calibration of thromboplastin ISI in POC devices, has not been explored in a paediatric population. Further studies are needed to clarify such issues and confirm the safety, reliability and efficacy of POC monitoring of oral anticoagulant therapy in children, including its home monitoring and self-management programs.

European Concerted Action on Anticoagulation. Quality Assessment of the CoaguChek Mini and TAS PT-NC Point-of-Care Whole-Blood Prothrombin Time Monitors

Background: International Normalized Ratios (INRs) for prothrombin time obtained with the CoaguChek Mini and TAS (RapidPointCoag) PT-NC systems are markedly different and also differ from the “true” INR. There is therefore a need for local quality assessment (QA) of the two systems.

Methods: A set of 60 lyophilized artificially depleted and 60 lyophilized coumarin plasmas were tested at 10 centers on both point-of-care testing monitors. Subsets of three and five plasmas were selected as QA plasmas and compared with the remaining 55 to assess the relative ability of the systems to characterize performance at the individual centers. The incidence of aberrant results (outliers; >15% deviation from the true INR) was also recorded. The expected incidence with the QA plasmas was calculated and compared.

Results: On both systems, INR with the common sets of 55 lyophilized plasmas varied considerably between centers. With the TAS PT-NC, subsets of five and three European Concerted Action on Anticoagulation (ECAA) artificially depleted plasmas gave good correlation with the 55 plasmas, but the coumarin plasmas performed less well. With the CoaguChek Mini, correlation was good with sets of five artificially depleted QA plasmas and reasonable with three but was less satisfactory with the coumarin plasmas. Outliers were detected with both types of plasmas on both test systems but with variable success.

Conclusions: With the TAS PT-NC, three ECAA artificially depleted lyophilized plasmas provided reliable QA, but five lyophilized coumarin plasmas were required. With the CoaguChek Mini, five artificially depleted plasmas gave reliable QA but coumarin plasmas gave poorer results. ECAA QA plasmas provide a local system for checking INRs obtained with monitors of both types.

Reliability of international normalised ratios from two point of care test systems: comparison with conventional methods

OBJECTIVE

To find out how accurately two point of care test systems--CoaguChek Mini and TAS PT-NC (RapidPointCoag)--display international normalised ratios (INRs).

DESIGN

Comparison of the INRs from the two systems with a "true" INR on a conventional manual test from the same sample of blood.

SETTING

10 European Concerted Action on Anticoagulation centres.

PARTICIPANTS

600 patients on long term dosage of warfarin.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Comparable results between the different methods.

RESULTS

The mean displayed INR differed by 21.3% between the two point of care test monitoring systems. The INR on one system was 15.2% higher, on average, than the true INR, but on the other system the INR was 7.1% lower. The percentage difference between the mean displayed INR and the true INR at individual centres varied considerably with both systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Improved international sensitivity index calibration of point of care test monitors by their manufacturers is needed, and better methods of quality control of individual instruments by their users are also needed.

Near-patient testing of haemostasis in the operating theatre: an approach to appropriate use of blood in surgery

Several haemostasis point-of-care (POC) monitors are now available in the operating theatre. Two of these are widely used; the Coaguchek and the thromboelastograph (TEG), but they have been developed in very different ways. Bedside-activated partial thromboplastin time and prothrombin time performed with the Coaguchek monitor seem to be reliable and have been used to build algorithms for transfusion decision making. They have been developed in close collaboration with haemostasis groups and therefore gain a benefit from these links. Conversely, TEG provides very important information except it has never been validated. The number of collaborative studies with biologists has to increase in order to implement the use of TEG in the routine practice.